Ethical Issue Grading Rubric
Student Name ______________________
Critique #1 (25 points)
Heading
0
1
2
3
4
5
Missing more than
3 items in the
heading
Does not explain
the ethical issue
Missing/ inaccurate
for 3
Missing/ inaccurate
for 2
Missing name, due
date, or ethical issue
Has all parts of both
headings
Issue cannot be
fully understood
from this
explanation
Missing summary
of issue or side of
issue
Missing Title,
author, source or
date of publication
Vague description
of the issue
Issue is clearly
explained and
thorough but not
one sided
Does not include
both the issue and
the side of the issue
the article
represents in full
detail
Ethical issue is
clearly explained,
thorough and from
one side of the issue
Is easily understood
and well described
in your own words
Contains 3 terms,
well defined, and
are challenging
terms
Article is not
current (within 2
years)
Article could be
more science based;
better source with
more details
Article is clearly on
one side of issue;
current; scientific
and valid
Summary of
article
Does not
summarize the
article
Explanation of the
issue was not
derived from the
article cited
Is not a full
summary of the
article
3 Terms
Definitions are
vague and not
relevant to the
article; has no terms
One or more of the
terms are simple
terms; missing 2
terms
3 Questions
Has less than 3
questions
Article Relevance
No article attached
Not much thought
is behind the 3
questions
Article is vague, not
scientific and not
valid
Terms could be
better applied to the
meaning in the
article; missing one
term
Contains 3
questions, well
thought out
Article is not clearly
on one side of the
issue or the other
0
1
2
3
4
5
Missing more than
3 items in the
heading
Does not explain
the ethical issue
Missing/ inaccurate
for 3
Missing/ inaccurate
for 2
Missing name, due
date, or ethical issue
Has all parts of both
headings
Issue cannot be
fully understood
from this
explanation
Missing summary
of issue or side of
issue
Missing Title,
author, source or
date of publication
Vague description
of the issue
Issue is clearly
explained and
thorough but not
one sided
Does not include
both the issue and
the side of the issue
the article
represents in full
detail
Ethical issue is
clearly explained,
thorough and from
one side of the issue
Is easily understood
and well described
in your own words
Terms could be
better applied to the
meaning in the
article; missing one
term
Contains 3
questions, well
thought out
Article is not clearly
on one side of the
issue or the other
Article could be
more science based;
better source with
more details
Article is clearly on
one side of issue;
current; scientific
and valid
Brief outline of
ethical issue
Is not explained in
an easily
understood manner
Critique #2 (25 points)
Heading
Summary of
article
Does not
summarize the
article
Explanation of the
issue was not
derived from the
article cited
Is not a full
summary of the
article
3 Terms
Definitions are
vague and not
relevant to the
article; has no terms
One or more of the
terms are simple
terms; missing 2
terms
3 Questions
Has less than 3
questions
Article Relevance
No article attached
Not much thought
is behind the 3
questions
Article is vague, not
scientific and not
valid
Brief outline of
ethical issue
Is not explained in
an easily
understood manner
Contains 3 terms,
well defined, and
are challenging
terms
Article is not
current (within 2
years)
Paper (20 points)
Aesthetics
Sources
Issue explanation
0
1
2
3
The paper was
covered in grammar
and/or spelling
errors; not
proofread; >5 errors
Sources are not
listed
Does not explain
the ethical issue
Paper is less than a
page in length or
paper has 3
spelling/grammar
errors
Paper is not typed
Correct length (13); no spelling or
grammar errors;
typed
Pro Side
Does not
summarize the pro
side of the issue
Con Side
Does not
summarize the pro
side of the issue
4
5
Thorough but not
well described
Is not explained in
an easily
understood manner
Clearly defines the
issue and is easily
understood and well
described;
supported by source
knowledge
Is easily understood
and well described
in your own words
Is not explained in
an easily
understood manner
Is easily understood
and well described
in your own words
Sources are listed
Vague description
and is not clear as to
what the issue is
Issue is described
but has no proof of
research made; no
factual information
given
Is written biasedly;
is not a fair
explanation of this
side of the issue
Is written biasedly;
is not a fair
explanation of this
side of the issue
Lacking detail; does
not show much
knowledge on the
topic
Opinion Essay (20 points)
0
Original opinion
Does not have
original opinion
Current opinion
(X3)
Does not explain
the ethical issue
1
Vague description
and is not clear as to
what the issue is or
which side you are
truly on
2
3
4
5
No support is given
for why original
opinion
Very limited
support is given for
why original
opinion
Lacking detail; does
not show much
knowledge on the
topic
Reason for interest
in the topic not
mentioned
Opinion and why
topic was chosen
are clearly
explained
Clearly defines
opinion and is
easily understood
and well described;
supported by source
knowledge
Issue is described
but has no proof of
research made; no
factual information
given
Thorough but not
well described